....
1) Conservative politics….We all know that the library profession is extremely liberal in its political leanings. To prove this all you have to do is look at the big name speakers at A.L.A. conferences. How many conservatives have there been among this group in the past 40 years? Maybe one or two at most. Librarians would rather be validated than challenged when it comes to politics. But it goes beyond that. Many librarians think that conservatives are selfish, stupid, unsophisticated, and ultimately evil people. Conservatism is not an alternative political viewpoint to the library profession; it is a curse. The unfortunate issue here is that our many city councils, county boards, and state legislatures are ruled by conservative politicians. These are the folks who hold our purse strings. Isn’t it time to stop demonizing them and start dialoging with them? Don’t even think about it if you want that big promotion.
2) Organized religion….The library profession is very wary of organized religion, because religious morality is the banner that many book censors wave. Many librarians disdain organized religion because they think it is repressive, judgmental, irrational, evangelical, and overly structured. If you are a librarian it is okay to freely talk about your spiritual quest as long as you do not mention that you belong to an organized church. It’s also very okay to be openly atheistic and agnostic because this shows you are a thinking person who has overcome an early childhood attachment to superstition. If you have to be an avowed member of a formal religion, Buddhism seems to be your best bet. Buddhism seems to be the cool religion right now. Protestantism and Catholicism definitely are not. If you are a member of a formal Christian Church keep that part of your life in the closet for the good of your career.
3) Censorship – Perhaps the most career limiting move that you could make in the library profession is to refuse to toe the line with the anything goes philosophy of the ALA Office of Intellectual Freedom. I am still getting criticism heaped on me for a series of articles that I wrote in the 1990s advocating that filters be put on children’s room computers to block out pornography. Really! I’m pretty sure that the library profession is the only profession in the world that wants children to have access to pornography. Why? Because everyone is afraid of being called a censor. It is the death nail in the career coffin. The irony of all of this is that the library profession touts itself as the champion of intellectual freedom. If that’s true why can’t we freely express our dissenting views of an "anything goes" philosophy of intellectual freedom…or conservative politics…or organized religion for that matter?
And why are librarians afraid to be called a censor? That would be courtesy of former de facto ALA leader Judith Krug and her bringing her ACLU leadership policies and enforcement tactics to the ALA.
Librarians Should Take Back Control of the Office for Intellectual Freedom From the Porn Pushers
Look in the comments on Will's post to see comment after comment by librarians speaking out to agree with Will. Judith Krug, may she rest in peace, has passed on and the new leader of the OIF is a poor substitute. The deputy director is a plagiarizer and an unethical astroturfer. (Administrative Assistant Bryan Campbell is honest but I'll leave that for another story.) Maybe now is the time for librarians to do what they know is right and take back control of the OIF from the Krug/ACLU acolytes.
See also:
- "The Anything Goes ALA is Out of the Mainstream by Defending the Right of Children to Access Pornography in Public Libraries" at http://tinyurl.com/WillManley
- "The Conservatives Among Us," by Will Manley, American Libraries, 30 November 2010
The Annoyed Librarian Outs Smut Peddling Librarians
By the way, the other top library blogger also pointed out that the ALA is "pro-porn." See: "Libraries and Porn Privacy," by Annoyed Librarian, Library Journal, 27 April 2011. "But if librarians insist on sounding like smut peddlers, the articles will keep coming. If this is the hill librarians want to die on while they pretend they’re protecting free speech, then so be it." That's the Library Journal post, by the way, where the Annoyed Librarian agrees with my view of the ALA in the Brooklyn Public Library porn matter saying, "Safe Libraries Guy argues that the problem is the ALA urging libraries to disregard federal law. He does have a point there." Lawyers take note.And see how the Annoyed Librarian mocks "library porn mavens" in still more evidence of the ALA's anything-goes policy:
The argument against Internet filters may have some technological weight, but it has no moral weight at all, which is why the ALA has done such a bad job of persuading Congress of the American right to salivate over Internet porn at the taxpayer's expense. An Internet filter for porn is just a technological version of the filter that librarians use when they don't subscribe to hard core porn magazines for their public library. It's called selection, and it requires judgment about what "information" is appropriate for a library. The ALA evades any debates about selection and judgment by classifying everything as "information" and then saying everyone should have access to all of it."Library Porn Challenge," by Annoyed Librarian, Annoyed Librarian, 5 March 2007, emphasis added.
I get a lot of criticism for saying the ALA pushes porn on children. But I make that statement based on solid evidence including that presented by the likes of Will Manley and the Annoyed Librarian. For example, just search on what the Annoyed Librarian has said about the ALA's love for porn.
A First Amendment Right to Porn in the Public Library?
The Annoyed Librarian is so funny. Look at this. Here is the ALA's First Amendment:
Library Bill of Rights
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and view publicly subsidized pornography in their local library.
Speaking of librarians "acting like smut peddlers," "Smut!" by Tom Lehrer is the ALA's anthem.
Will Your Community Stop the ALA From Targeting Children?
"[T]he library profession is the only profession in the world that
wants children to have access to pornography."
Will Manley said that. Any questions? Any community want the ALA anywhere near your public libraries and your children while it continues along its current path? Will librarians finally move to deradicalize the ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom? Anyone want to write a guest blog post for SafeLibraries to say what it's like in your own libraries?
.
These three reasons are ultimately why stopped pursuing my MLIS degree. After three semesters, I knew my conscience would not allow me to toe the line in the ultra-liberal world of library science. Now I am opposed to the ALA, who seek to usurp the Supreme Court’s power of determining protected from unprotected speech, and, so long as they continue to be the only body accrediting Library Science degrees, I also vehemently oppose library schools and libraries themselves.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is a liberal idea to offer the freedom of information and ideas to anyone. Notice that's liberal with a lowercase l, not the Democratic party Liberals. Huge difference. Yes, you might have to stock novels including LGBTQ characters even though you hate gay people or think they shouldn't have any legal rights. Evil, I know. We wouldn't want children reading books and getting ideas because everyone knows that reading books causes you to become exactly like what you read.
DeleteThank you for commenting, Richard Roy. You may also wish to look at my latest post:
ReplyDelete"Librarians Library Porn Problem Detailed by the Library Journal's Annoyed Librarian"
Perhaps consider "subscribing" to this blog.
You are forgetting one thing. Filters don't work. Our library has filters and still has banned a patron from computer use for viewing inappropriate sites (adult computers). Ultimately, parents need to be responsible, even (especially) in the library.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, thanks for the comment. Not only do filters work, but the person I can point to as the reliable source to prove that is the very leader of the ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom:
Delete"ALA Admits Library Filters Work; Barbara Jones Bursts Her Own Breast Cancer Bubble," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 3 February 2012.
It is quite possible your library's filters are either not the best or are not being managed efficiently, but that does not mean filters do not work. Yes, parents should be responsible, but that does not mean filters should not assist parents and others.
Hey, I am literally the first person to publish Bradburn v. NCRL. Get a load of this:
"How to Filter Public Library Computers: Bradburn v NCRL Shows Libraries Need Not Approve Unblock Requests," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 24 April 2013.
They can say they work all they want. On the ground, when filters are used, porn sites are still accessible and random other sites (including sometimes .gov sites) are not. Parents need to watch their children. End of story.
Delete